How to fail a build because there are no artifacts?

[Deleted user]

In Bamboo (5.7.2) one can have multiple artifact definitions for a given build plan. Am I missing something, or it does not seem possible to configure for each artifact definition how many artifacts it must produce, otherwise build should fail. Now it seems that one can have many artifact definitions but all are allowed not to produce any artifacts, and build will just happily pass and output "There have been no artifacts set up for this job." even though definitions are there.

[Przemek Bruski · Accepted solution]

The build will only fail if Bamboo detects that there are jobs with artifact subscriptions for that artifact. You could set up a job depending on all these artifacts. Make it run on a local agent to make it faster.

[Deleted user]

It's a workaround, yes, thanks. Already applied similar workaround, created a stage in same build, after artifact producing stage, to download and verify that artifacts are there. But that's stupid. I should be able to at least control those constraints from artifact definition, choose whether it's ok for no artifacts to come out of artifact definition or not. Created a bug report https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/BAM-15872

[Przemek Bruski]

That behaviour is by design, it's not a bug.

[Deleted user]

Please give me an example, where that behavior is useful, that same artifact definition in same build plan sometimes produces and sometimes not artifacts, and that you'd like/expect build to pass in both cases. Please share link(s) if this behaviour of artifact definition is documented somewhere. I only see one hint of this behavior on build definition create/edit popup page, it has this note "If you subscribe to an unavailable shared artifact the build will fail.". What if artifact is not shared? Do you think this behaviour adheres to principle of least astonishment? In other words, would you expect this behaviour as Bamboo user?

[Chris Gembarowski]

I completely agree with @[deleted].  This designed behavior makes no sense.  Please explain the logic behind the design of this behavior.

[Kristian Svensson]

For anyone coming back to this thread it looks like a required checkbox has been added to the artifact definition.

https://confluence.atlassian.com/bamboo/configuring-a-job-s-build-artifacts-289277071.html

[typoheads2]

*thumbsup*

[Nima Rafiei]

I came back to this thread :) running Bamboo version 6.7.2

However, {{required}} option does not seem to work anymore (since we upgraded from Bamboo 5.9(?).x).

I had accidentally specified the wrong location for my xml and even though it was a {{required}} artifact the build did not fail, it just published the artifact with 0 bytes.

What is going on?

Should be noted: Plan is run on a remote (linux) agent, while the Bamboo server is running on Win 10 machine. However, the artifact successfully publishes if the path and filename is correct (and not wrong as I mentioned above)

[Dean Penfold]

I have the same seen the same behavior on 6.7.2 build 60706.

Did you find any success in either solving or explaining the contradiction?

[David Ward]

I agree with Stevo on this one. I have a build and then I can't create an artifact because the necessary artifact subdirectory does not exist. Why do I want that to be successful? It violates your whole premise of Fail Fast because, now, some downstream build is going to fail not the original one.

You even highlight the error in red in the log file - so I don't think even you guys think it's successful.

Maybe there are  times when artifact creation should not be a failure, but it should be simple enough to add a boolean for this in the artifact definition.